cscboulder11 Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2012/10/15/lawsuit-doctors-intentionally-concealed-decapitation-of-baby-during-delivery/ ...Just how does something like this happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DwayneEMTP Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 I'm guessing that by the time the C-section was deemed necessary that bringing the head back above the birth canal wasn't practical for some reason. The child, or so it sounds, would have already been considered deceased so was removed in two pieces, I'm guessing, so as to be safer for the mother. They don't make any mention of how they attempted to conceal the decapitation. I don't know much about delivering Babies, but force enough to sever arteries seems like a lot, just intuitively. Hopefully one of the docs will comment... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFIB Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 I was privy to a similar case many years ago. The baby's shoulders became lodged in the birth canal. The Dr. cut the symphysis pubis and successfully delivered the baby, There are better ways than pulling it's head off. I'm guessing that by the time the C-section was deemed necessary that bringing the head back above the birth canal wasn't practical for some reason. The child, or so it sounds, would have already been considered deceased so was removed in two pieces, I'm guessing, so as to be safer for the mother. They don't make any mention of how they attempted to conceal the decapitation. I don't know much about delivering Babies, but force enough to sever arteries seems like a lot, just intuitively. Hopefully one of the docs will comment... The article seems to indicate positive vascular pressure when the head came off as evidenced by squirting. It is weird that they stuffed the head back into the birth canal. Can you imagine the horror? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuralKSEMS Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 That's sad, disturbing and disgusting. She should have demanded a c-section or another doctor if that's what she felt was needed. I agree with the need to sue (and i"m not sue happy AT ALL) and also criminal charges against the doctor. That's malice right there if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DwayneEMTP Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 I'm thinking that possibly the bleeding came long before the head was removed, but mom and dad assumed that it came at the same time. Know what I mean? Lots of blood, ultimately the baby had no head, so removal of head must have caused lots of blood. But I'd be willing to bet that the blood came first, and then during the attempt to remove the body that the head had to be removed. The article makes it sound like, "oops! The head just popped right off!" Now, I've never tried to pull the head off of a baby, but I'm willing to bet that it wouldn't be accomplished without dragging mom all over the room by her kooch...and they probably would have mentioned that in the story.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFIB Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 I'm thinking that possibly the bleeding came long before the head was removed, but mom and dad assumed that it came at the same time. Know what I mean? Lots of blood, ultimately the baby had no head, so removal of head must have caused lots of blood. But I'd be willing to bet that the blood came first, and then during the attempt to remove the body that the head had to be removed. The article makes it sound like, "oops! The head just popped right off!" Now, I've never tried to pull the head off of a baby, but I'm willing to bet that it wouldn't be accomplished without dragging mom all over the room by her kooch...and they probably would have mentioned that in the story.. The obvious question would be. Why would they not inform parents that the baby is dead and explore the recovery operation options. I saw a lot of forceps a while ago and you are right. It takes a lot of force to rip a head off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ERDoc Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 (edited) I don't even know what to say. How strong does the doctor and mom's pelvis have to be in order to rip off the head? This article just reeks of over-dramatization but that is usually what happens when you have lawyers and the press involved. If the baby's head is off, how the hell do you push it back in? It's hard enough to get it to go the way it is supposed to, but it must take even more work to get it to go the other way. There are just too many unanswered questions to really make any judgement but how the hell do you pull hard enough to decapitate someone by hand? EDIT: I'd be curious to know if the baby had any other injuries. If the doctor was pulling hard enough to pull of the head, surely both clavicles were fractured not to mention lots of other signs of trauma. If I had to come up with a viable scenario I would say the baby's first should was delivered and was too big to deliver the second. Bleeding is common during delivery and the parents are probably not used to the sight of blood. The placenta may have separated also leading to bleeding but would also result in death of the fetus. Fast forward to the OR and a c-section is being done and baby is dead or close to it. Head/shoulder is still stuck and nothing can be done before baby expires. Only was to get baby out at this point is to decapitate it. If anyone has read Learning to Play God by Robert Marion, he experienced something similar during his OB rotation as a med student I think. Edited October 17, 2012 by ERDoc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DwayneEMTP Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 Yeah, that's why I'm betting, if there is any truth at all in the story, that it went something like this... A vaginal delivery was attempted. The head and arm was delivered (the story makes more sense if it's the hand and crowning, which dad may have seen as the same thing) during which there is significant damage to the baby, and forcepts seem (for what I know if it) the most likely instrument to have cause it. At some point the doc decides that a vag delivery isn't going to happen so tries to push the baby backwards into a better position for c-section (though this seems unlikely). During the c-section it's discovered that pulling the head back through the birth canal just isn't a realistic option, so the head is severed, the head removed vaginally, and the body through the incision... Regardless of what happened, it sounds like a crazy kind of mess... Is anyone else surprised that the hospital wasn't named in the suite? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curiosity Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 (edited) I'm wondering if it wasn't just a separation of the skull from the spine and not a complete decapitation and the blood they saw is normal. Edit: I found a more detailed article seeming from the court about it. It has a few more details. http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/10/02/50841.htm Edited October 17, 2012 by Curiosity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DwayneEMTP Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 You know, I thought about an internal decapitation instead, but they seemed to be pretty specific in the article... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts